[B-Greek] hUPAKOHN PISTEWS

John Wilking jcwilking at yahoo.com
Sat Dec 20 16:25:24 EST 2008


George,

Neogrammarian issues aside, are there any analogies of pattern that may shed light on Elliott's assertions?


--- On Sat, 12/20/08, George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] hUPAKOHN PISTEWS
> To: jcwilking at yahoo.com, B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> Date: Saturday, December 20, 2008, 3:22 PM
> I disagree.  Language is rule oriented up to a point.  It
> is always the most common words in a language which are
> irregular.
>  george
> gfsomsel 
> 
> 
> … search for truth, hear truth, 
> learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, 
> defend the truth till death.
> 
> 
> - Jan Hus
> _________ 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: John Wilking <jcwilking at yahoo.com>
> To: B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org; George F Somsel
> <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 3:02:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] hUPAKOHN PISTEWS
> 
> George,
> 
> Romans 1:5 is what Elliott is referring to. I'm
> wondering if his understanding can be supported by a
> grammatical/semantic pattern evidenced in other couplets. 
> My question reflects a neogrammarian perspective: all
> language is rule ordered, just find the rule (or pattern).
> 
> John
> 
> 
> --- On Sat, 12/20/08, George F Somsel
> <gfsomsel at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Re: [B-Greek] hUPAKOHN PISTEWS
> > To: jcwilking at yahoo.com, B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> > Date: Saturday, December 20, 2008, 2:24 PM
> > ὑπακοή [hUPAKOH] and πίστις [PISTIS]
> are
> > coupled together in Rom 1.5 
> > 
> > διʼ οὗ ἐλάβομεν χάριν καὶ
> > ἀποστολὴν εἰς ὑπακοὴν
> πίστεως
> > ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ὑπὲρ
> > τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ 
> >  
> > DI' hOU ELABOMEN XARIN KAI APOSTOLH EIS hUPAKOHN
> PISTEW
> > EN PASIN TOIS EQNESIN hUPER TOU ONOMATOS AUTOU
> >  
> > and Rom 16.26
> > 
> > φανερωθέντος δὲ νῦν διά τε
> > γραφῶν προφητικῶν κατʼ
> > ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ αἰωνίου θεοῦ
> εἰς
> > ὑπακοὴν πίστεως εἰς πάντα
> τὰ
> > ἔθνη γνωρισθέντος, 
> >  
> > FANERWQENTOS DE NUN DIA TE GRAFWN PROFHTIKWN KAT'
> > EPITAGHN TOU AIWNIOU QEOU EIS hUPAKOHN PISTEW EIS
> PANTA TA
> > EQNH GNWRISQENTOS
> > 
> > Cranfield details various possibilities for this
> > combination in his ICC commentary
> > 
> > (i) ‘obedience to the faith’ (i.e., to faith in
> the
> > sense of fides quae creditor, the body of doctrine
> > accepted);
> > (ii) ‘obedience to faith’ (i.e., to the authority
> of
> > faith);
> > (iii) ‘obedience to God’s faithfulness attested in
> the
> > gospel’;
> > (iv) ‘the obedience which faith works’;
> > (v) ‘the obedience required by faith’;
> > (vi) ‘believing obedience’;
> > (vii) ‘the obedience which consists in faith’.
> >  
> > Cranfield, C. E. B. (2004). A critical and exegetical
> > commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (66). London;
> New
> > York: T&T Clark International.
> > 
> > Cranfield notes that 1-3 are objective genitives, 4
> &
> > 5 are subjective genitives, 6 is adjectival and 7 is
> > appositive and opts for 7.  This seems to be the
> choice
> > which Elliott makes according to what you have said. 
> > Personally, I tend to think it could be all of the
> above. 
> > We sometimes tend to classify usages so strictly that
> we
> > exclude what may seem to be legitimate
> understandings.  The
> > Greek would simply have seen a noun in the genitive
> related
> > to a noun in the accusative.  He was free to draw his
> own
> > conclusions regarding what it meant.  It seems
> interesting
> > to me that it is not simply ὑπακοὴν
> πίστεως
> > [hUPAKOHN PISTEWS] but εἰς ὑπακοὴν
> > πίστεως [EIS hUPAKOHN PISTEWS] in both
> cases.  Thus
> > "the obedience of faith" (however construed)
> is
> > the objective.
> > 
> > george
> > gfsomsel 
> > 
> > 
> > … search for truth, hear truth, 
> > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the
> truth, 
> > defend the truth till death.
> > 
> > 
> > - Jan Hus
> > _________ 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > From: John Wilking <jcwilking at yahoo.com>
> > To: B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> > Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 12:07:55 PM
> > Subject: [B-Greek] hUPAKOHN PISTEWS
> > 
> > 
> > Neil Elliott wrote a book, The Arrogance Of Nations,
> > Reading Romans in the Shadow of Empire.  He says that
> > hUPAKOHN and PISTEWS are almost interchangeable in
> Romans,
> > and when combined in the genitive phrase hUPAKOHN
> PISTEWS,
> > PISTEWS functions as an adjective, "faithful
> > obedience."
> > 
> > Are there other examples in which
> "interchangeable
> > terms" are combined, resulting in the same or
> similar
> > functions?
> > 
> > John C. Wilking  
> > 
> > 
> >       
> > ---
> > B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> > B-Greek mailing list
> > B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek


      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list